Funkyterrance wrote:I am aware that I am not always perfectly clear at first, my apologies. It appears that your view towards racists is that they are akin to some other species. A nut to be cracked, if you will. I am suggesting that if you continue to look at a racist as fundamentally different than you, you will never reach one with your "explanations".

Nah dog. I see two types of racists. One is a sort of casual racist. Uninformed. Operating on societal pressures and trends. Similar to the idea of rape culture in feminism. They don't know or otherwise can't recognize that their biases are degrading or harmful. These people are targets for education. For dialogue. For effort and hope. Their minds can be changed. This is the majority of people.

Then there are the other guys. They tend to be guys, actually. Dudes, often. You can explain the variety of genetic and cultural background that makes up African populations. To them, they're still black or African. You can write sourced essays expounding on the nature of heritability and culture, and how they relate to perception and bias. You post direct links to reputable science, and be met with blogs and YouTube videos. You can write treatises on the power of cooperation and color blindness and be chastised as an opponent of progress and empiricism. Eventually you get to the point where you have to disengage or risk sticking a pencil into your eye. Because, when it comes down to it, you're only helping their cause. Legitimizing it. By taking them seriously, they win. So, the options become 1)ignore them, and let them spew their vitriolic hatred, or 2) tell them not just "no," but "f*ck no!" "Intolerance will not be tolerated." They can spew their hate, and I will shower them with shame. That's all they really know anyway.

So, maybe I do view that class of cretin as inhuman. Maybe I'm just as bad as they are, judging them by their words and actions instead of by their color and nationality. Maybe there will be some crossover. Some collateral from the first group put off by me. But I trust in their rationality. They'll figure it out. But I cannot abide the second group poisoning the process. f*ck 'em.

Thanks for painting a clearer picture for me. The delineation between the two types of racists you describe makes me wonder if what you are really objecting to as a character trait is ignorance rather than racism? More specifically, ignorance by choice. It is equated as hate but if someone is ignorant of the fact that the concept of race is imaginary then they may truly feel justified in their actions. There are many, many other instances of choosing to remain ignorant and hateful despite facts provided but those instances get undermined since the groups they target are not able to be at all physically described. A racist can undeniably tell if someone has more pigment in their skin and therefore their victims are immediately apparent to all involved. However, the anti-Christian, for example, can hate without a specific physical characteristic. Therefore they are much harder to peg as what they are. Why not lash out at this general mindset instead of focusing on one type of "ist"?

Because that sort of specificity and high-mindedness does not lend itself as well to internet one-liners.

You're right that racists and sexists and homophobes (i'm an equal opportunity Crusader for Justice, this thread is just explicitly about racism) are sort of easy targets. This contributes to my frustration. We should be so far beyond this as a society. Why are these people still here? How are they not ashamed of themselves? Their status as easy targets doesn't alleviate the fact that they need to be addressed in some way. There is plenty of social activism to go around, and I'm happy to be involved across a spectrum of issues. The relative import of various brands of willful ignorance will always be measured subjectively. As long as we are hashing them all out, I'm going to be pretty satisfied.

john9blue wrote:i read through the thread and the only other person who has a solid grasp of statistics is AOG

what has this forum become

Is there some phantom post by AoG showing some sort of statistical analysis proving that the average black-skinned person is more athletic than the average white-skinned person? If there is, can someone please show it to me.

john9blue wrote:i read through the thread and the only other person who has a solid grasp of statistics is AOG

what has this forum become

Is there some phantom post by AoG showing some sort of statistical analysis proving that the average black-skinned person is more athletic than the average white-skinned person? If there is, can someone please show it to me.

statistics isn't about proof, it's about probability and inference.

natty_dread wrote:Do ponies have sex?

Army of GOD wrote:the term heterosexual is offensive. I prefer to be called "normal"

john9blue wrote:i read through the thread and the only other person who has a solid grasp of statistics is AOG

what has this forum become

Is there some phantom post by AoG showing some sort of statistical analysis proving that the average black-skinned person is more athletic than the average white-skinned person? If there is, can someone please show it to me.

statistics isn't about proof, it's about probability and inference.

Is there some phantom post by AoG shwing sort of statistical analysis showing the probability and inferring that the average black-skinned person is more athletic than the average white-skinned person? If there is, can someone please show it to me.

john9blue wrote:i read through the thread and the only other person who has a solid grasp of statistics is AOG

what has this forum become

Is there some phantom post by AoG showing some sort of statistical analysis proving that the average black-skinned person is more athletic than the average white-skinned person? If there is, can someone please show it to me.

statistics isn't about proof, it's about probability and inference.

Is there some phantom post by AoG shwing sort of statistical analysis showing the probability and inferring that the average black-skinned person is more athletic than the average white-skinned person? If there is, can someone please show it to me.

You guys are slippery fucks, but I'll pin you down yet.

well i'd like to hear your explanation for the disproportionate amount of blacks in professional sports...

unless you are simply rejecting my explanation without providing one of your own, which would be very atheisty of you

natty_dread wrote:Do ponies have sex?

Army of GOD wrote:the term heterosexual is offensive. I prefer to be called "normal"

john9blue wrote:i read through the thread and the only other person who has a solid grasp of statistics is AOG

what has this forum become

Is there some phantom post by AoG showing some sort of statistical analysis proving that the average black-skinned person is more athletic than the average white-skinned person? If there is, can someone please show it to me.

statistics isn't about proof, it's about probability and inference.

Is there some phantom post by AoG shwing sort of statistical analysis showing the probability and inferring that the average black-skinned person is more athletic than the average white-skinned person? If there is, can someone please show it to me.

You guys are slippery fucks, but I'll pin you down yet.

well i'd like to hear your explanation for the disproportionate amount of blacks in professional sports...

unless you are simply rejecting my explanation without providing one of your own, which would be very atheisty of you

I did posit one theory if you remember, I just didn't form it entirely so here goes:

Black skinned people are on average lower income than white skinned.Lower income individuals are physically and perhaps psychologically "tougher" than higher income individuals due to harder living conditions.Physically/mentally tough individuals will perform better at professional sports.Therefore, there are more black skinned professional athletes than white skinned.

At least it's something and seems to ring with truth. It has obvious holes but no facet can be thrown out as undeniably false. The point is that the color of skin is purely situational. Its also assumed that this example applies to the US. I think I am going to actually rest my case on this one guys, it's becoming a dead subject.

thegreekdog wrote:ITT: AoG thinks that 76% of the NBA (or 342 of 450 players) consisting of black men means that the average black person is more athletic than the average white person.

oh, so NOW you understand my argument

You have to admit TGD, he's got his right to his opinion.

That blacks have bigger muscles than whites? On average?

No that he chooses to believe that the fact that the NBA is composed of 76% black people is enough evidence that the average black person is more athletic than the average white person. It has all other kinds of implications but it's not our problem.

john9blue wrote:i read through the thread and the only other person who has a solid grasp of statistics is AOG

what has this forum become

Is there some phantom post by AoG showing some sort of statistical analysis proving that the average black-skinned person is more athletic than the average white-skinned person? If there is, can someone please show it to me.

statistics isn't about proof, it's about probability and inference.

Is there some phantom post by AoG shwing sort of statistical analysis showing the probability and inferring that the average black-skinned person is more athletic than the average white-skinned person? If there is, can someone please show it to me.

You guys are slippery fucks, but I'll pin you down yet.

well i'd like to hear your explanation for the disproportionate amount of blacks in professional sports...

unless you are simply rejecting my explanation without providing one of your own, which would be very atheisty of you

thegreekdog wrote:ITT: AoG thinks that 76% of the NBA (or 342 of 450 players) consisting of black men means that the average black person is more athletic than the average white person.

oh, so NOW you understand my argument

You have to admit TGD, he's got his right to his opinion.

That blacks have bigger muscles than whites? On average?

No that he chooses to believe that the fact that the NBA is composed of 76% black people is enough evidence that the average black person is more athletic than the average white person. It has all other kinds of implications but it's not our problem.

Hockey?

Yeah well that one we can squash pretty quickly. Considering the cost difference between hockey gear and say.. a cheap basketball, one is exceedingly easier for a poor kid to get started on.

Yeah well that one we can squash pretty quickly. Considering the cost difference between hockey gear and say.. a cheap basketball, one is exceedingly easier for a poor kid to get started on.

And again, I will point you to soccer.

Tbh, I am not all that familiar with the statistics regarding soccer, or much other sports for that matter. So far I am just trusting the stats given on here as accurate. Pick a country regarding soccer and the proportions and we can go from there?